Research Supporting Time Management 2.0

As I curate the time management research that has been completed by academics around the world, I am seeing where the essential tenets of Time Management 2.0 are being validated in small steps. While I don’t expect anyone to write a paper anytime soon to test these tenets in one complete dissertation or published paper, it’s interesting to see that our observations from training hundreds of people are being formally validated.

This page will be continually updated as we gain access to archived research, and as new research is completed. From the page on the website describing the tenets

Time Management 2.0 is all about:

– refusing to play “follow the leader.” Giving up on ever trying to squeeze someone else’ one-size-fits-all-perfectly-defined-prescription-for-productivity into your messy, busy chaotic life

….results showed that people with certain personality characteristics (conscientiousness and emotional stability) and certain pacing styles have a tendency to engage more in time management behaviors, to experience a higher perceived control of time and occupational self-efficacy, and score higher on job-performance and effectiveness. Thus organizations may improve their performance and effectiveness by selecting people with these characteristics and pacing styles.

It was found that the different types of time management behavior were, as in the previous model, directly related to job-related outcomes as well as indirectly….

Results showed that, in general, people with different styles differed with respect to planning behavior, priority focus, perceived control of time, and self-rated and externally-rated job performance and effectiveness.

– recognizing that you already have your own way of managing your time and it should act as a starting point for any changes you make (and should never be ignored)

time management training had little influence on whether respondents engaged in these behaviors … suggests that time management training may not explain much of the reported variance in the behaviors. Most variation in time management behaviors, individuals learn the components of time management in other ways besides a formal time management training program. For example, throughout life, a person may observe others making lists, scheduling, and leaving a clean work space and may choose to adopt these techniques.

– being realistic. Once the decision is made to make some changes, new habits are adopted slowly by even the best-intentioned. Even a major overhaul takes place one habit at a time, and a plan that works must take our stubborn humanity into account

Instead, we argue that the differences between expert performers and normal adults reflect a life-long period of deliberate effort to improve performance in a specific domain….

We view elite performance as the product of a decade or more
of maximal efforts to improve performance in a domain
through an optimal distribution of deliberate practice.

Our empirical studies have already shown that experts carefully schedule deliberate practice and limit its duration to avoid exhaustion and burnout. By viewing expert performers not simply as domain-specific experts but as experts in maintaining high levels of practice and improving performance, we are likely to uncover valuable information about the optimal conditions for learning and education.

Putting together the findings of these time management studies as well as our observation with students, we believe that time management is a complex behaviour repertoire. It involves not only cognitive understanding and skills but also attitudes. Successful time management programmes tend to provide a deep learning environment in which learners are allowed to increase self-understanding and to clarify personal goals, to apply time management principles and techniques, and to get feedback for continuous improvement so as to bring about behavioural change.

As I unearth more research, I’ll be adding it to this list. If you would like to contribute to it using other academic sources, please let me know.

My next step, perhaps, is to assemble a hypothesis tree to show the assumptions that have been put together that underlie Time Management 2.0 thinking. Each of these hypotheses deserves to be tested, but my back of the envelope tree indicates that it requires “a whole bunch” of research hours to answer each question empirically. For a copy of my handwritten draft, just ask.